Legal Question in Business Law in India

Re: Corporate Law

Hallo Friend

Please find the case law on corporate law hereunder. If you need more cases please let me know the further details:

In Jawahar Lal Oswal vs. ACIT [1999] 71 ITD 324 (Chd), the tribunal after considering the decisions of CIT vs. Mrs. Sunita Vachani [1990] 184 ITR 121 (Del); D.C. Rastogi (HUF) vs. ACIT [1996] 57 ITD 295 (Del); McDowell & Co. Ltd. vs. CIT [1985] 154 ITR 148 (SC) and many other decisions, laid down the following principles:

The provisions of section 68 or 69A are applicable whether funds have come from abroad or they have emanated in India.

All the three conditions namely identity, financial capacity and genuineness of the transaction have to be fulfilled but considering �

that adverse inference under the given circumstances may not be drawn in case the donor who is abroad does not appear before the assessing officer based in any part of India;

the material or evidence collected by a Government agency abroad and passed on to the tax department in India has to be confronted to the assessee fully well realising that the said Government agency had made enquiries as it deemed fit and these may not be on the lines which the tax authorities in India would make while confronting a donor or creditor located in India and;

neither the assessing officer in India, for that matter, nor the assessee has any say in the enquiry made abroad, whether through the foreign Government or for that matter the Indian Embassy, High Commission, Consulate, etc. In other words, both of them have to depend on the report sent from abroad and use it to their advantage or disadvantage of the other but on the same analogy an assessee could not be heard of saying that there should be relaxation for him but strict rules be applied for the revenue. Both should have a equal level field.

The allegation based entirely upon suspicion, surmises and conjectures have no room

Re: Corporate Law

Hallo Friend

You have not clarified your query whehter you want Indian case law or other countries. However, I am providing you all the important case law on corporate law.

In 1868, the Supreme Court ruled that corporations were not citizens within the context of Article IV Section 2 of the Constitution. Elaborating, the court defined a citizen to apply only to natural persons, members of the body politic, and those owing allegiance to the state. Corporations only had the properties conferred on it by the legislature. Citizenship incurred an obligation of allegiance to the state. The many cartel agreements that American corporations willingly signed with German corporations granted allegiance to the German corporations and hindered both world wars immensely.

In 1876, the Supreme Court ruled in Munn v. Illinois that corporations with a public interest (in this case, the rate grain elevators charged farmers for shipping) were subject to state regulation. The court further ruled that what constituted a reasonable rate was a legislative and not a judicial question. This case is also very similar to a case settled before the Wisconsin Supreme Court. In Attorney General v. Northwestern Railroad, the court ruled that the state could set maximum fares on classes of rail transportation.9

I am also sending you Indian case via other answer.

good luck

Re: Corporate Law

you can search in the concerned books